Key Findings
Research suggesting male superiority over women in certain spheres of life is often viewed less favorably than research that shows the opposite.
Perceived harm to women may be contributory to the existence of this view.
Both men and women exhibited similar levels of aversion to research favoring men, suggesting that the gender of the individual may not be a significant contributor to these perceptions.
Before now, scientific research on sex differences often generated a series of debates. This is especially true when findings from these studies suggest that men perform better than women on the set metrics analyzed in the study. On the other hand, studies have demonstrated that findings suggesting that women are superior to men in certain spheres of life are better received. What shapes these perceptions towards research findings on sex differences? This is the question explored in a study by Stewart-William, a professor of psychology at the University of Nottingham Malaysia, and his colleagues.
The study published in the International Journal of Psychology suggested that perceived harm to women could be a significant contributor to these negative reactions to research favoring male superiority over women.
How Was The Study Conducted?
At the start of the study, the researchers hypothesized that perceived harm to women could be a key contributor to these negative reactions towards research findings that favor male superiority over women. To test this hypothesis, they recruited 433 participants, involving a total of 214 men and 219 women. These participants were recruited via an online research platform known as Prolific.com.
Next, the participants were asked to provide their demographic details. Subsequently, they were introduced to the topic via a prelude that was designed to prime them with a particular perspective on sex-differences research. They did this by exposing some participants to literature concerning the benefits of sex-differences research while others were exposed to the drawbacks of the same research. Participants in the former and latter groups formed the ‘helpful’ and ‘harmful’ conditions respectively.
After this priming phase was over, the participants were presented with one of four versions of a popular science article that summarized the results of a fictional study on sex differences in intelligence, with some versions suggesting that men were more intelligent than women and others suggesting the opposite.
To manipulate the experimental conditions even further, they manipulated the names of the researchers with some of the versions suggesting that the lead author was a male and others suggesting that a woman led the study. However, this fictional study was actually well drafted to ensure that it appeared legitimate and that the participants did not suspect anything about it.
Participants Reacted More Negatively to Research Favoring Male Superiority
At the end of the study, the researchers observed that participants were more likely to react more negatively to a research finding if it reported that men were more intelligent than women than if it reported the opposite finding. They observed a similarity between their finding and those from previous studies.
What was even more interesting about their study was the fact that the observed aversion to male-favoring research results was not influenced by gender. This means that irrespective of their gender, participants were more averse to research that showed that men were more intelligent than women than toward research that suggested female superiority intellectually.
Perceived Harm to Women May Explain These Negative Reactions
Findings from this study suggested that perceived harm to women is a key contributor to these negative reactions. This was reflected in the fact that participants in the ‘harmful’ condition showed a stronger negative reaction to findings favoring men than those in the ‘helpful’ condition.
Commenting on the study, the lead author said, “The male-favoring aversion comes from a good place: People want to protect women.”
However, it is important to note that while these reactions appear to emerge from a place of genuine care, as the lead author commented, it does not necessarily mean that its effects are good. He suggested that interventions aimed at boosting spatial abilities, for instance, were a product of genuine research in understanding the sex-related difference in spatial abilities, which discovered that boys and men did relatively better than girls and women. He opined that if these findings were suppressed due to their social undesirability to spare people’s feelings, these interventions wouldn’t have been developed.
What Are The Study’s Limitations?
While the study reveals an interesting finding regarding the human mind, this study is not without limitations that affect its applicability to the entire population. For instance, participants involved in this study hailed from either the United Kingdom or the United States, with the former making up the majority of the population. This means that the findings of this study would be less likely to apply to people from other countries. In addition, because the online platform Prolific.com formed the sample frame for this study, the results of this study may not be representative of people outside this platform.
Beyond these limitations, the researchers observed that the study’s reliance on fictitious research summaries and preamble could have introduced a level of artificiality. Because these artificialities may not be able to capture the complexities of real-world reactions to sex differences research, the applicability of the study’s findings in the real world may require further research on the topic.
Related Reading:
Why Women Initiate Divorce More Often: Psychological, Financial, and Social Factors Behind Marriage Breakdowns
Women Hospitalized Under Female Doctors Have Lower Death and Complication Rates, Studies Show
Study Reveals Women Feel More Hurt When Excluded by Unattractive Women Rather Than Attractive Ones
FAQs
Does this study claim men are more intelligent than women?
No. The study used fictional data to test how people react to different outcomes.
Is male-favoring research always biased or harmful?
No. The study explored reactions, not the accuracy or intent of such research.
Did the study test real intelligence differences?
No. It used a fake article to simulate responses to controversial findings.
Do women react more negatively than men?
No. Both genders showed similar levels of negative response.
Why do people react more strongly to male-favoring results?
The study suggests it’s due to perceived harm to women.
Does the lead author’s gender matter?
Slightly. Negative reactions were stronger when the fictional study had a male author.
Bottom Line
This raises a difficult but important question: If society instinctively resists research that presents male advantages—even when the findings are rigorously studied and responsibly framed—are we at risk of overlooking discoveries that could benefit everyone? Suppressing or dismissing certain results out of discomfort may feel protective, but it could also limit scientific progress, stall interventions, and deepen polarization. Striving for objectivity, even in uncomfortable territory, may ultimately serve both equity and advancement.
References
Stewart‐Williams, S., Christine, Seto, S. A., Thomas, A. G., & Xiu Ling Wong. (2024). The harm hypothesis: How perceived harm to women shapes reactions to research on sex differences. International Journal of Psychology, 59(3). https://doi.org/10.1002/ijop.13101